StarGateWars Forums

GrizzZzzly wrote:@KMA

This is a bit silly now.

"I hate them because of personal reasons that i wont go into..."

thats not an arguement in any way, shape or form. If you want to actually debate this you would need to go into those personal reasons. But right now the only thing we're seeing is an experience-distorted prejudiced hatred on a group of people.

I never claimed it was any kind of argument. i stated my opinion for a group of "people" that i detest with every fibre of my being. as i have stated earlier...IF a queer wants to have the same feelings towards me and express them here on these boards i will defend his right to do so-so long as it is obviously within the rules of these boards.




@GrizzZzzly and Duck Dodgers, sorry, not trying to be nasty or offend you, but there are some things that remain personal and best not discussed. that's not to say that i am affected by my unwillingness to go in to details. suffice to say that i have a (if i do say so myself) a remarkable ability to put things out of my mind and not allow them to bother me. i don't go around bottling things up and then allowing those suppressed thoughts/emotions to dominate me in the slightest even though i have admitted to having something inside i can forget it just as easily as i can recall them


My brother on the other hand is VERY unforgiving in that, if you harm 1 hair on his head he will keep that grudge and will live to pay you back, even if it takes a lifetime, he will not let it drop and can be EXTREMELY hateful for the smallest transgression.

Dovahkiin wrote:

Duck Dodgers wrote:

Dovahkiin wrote:

Duck Dodgers wrote:

Dovahkiin wrote:

Duck Dodgers wrote:

Dovahkiin wrote:But even if that was a commandment, I would still take the position I have. Religion has no place dictating law.

Indeed, but culture does.

No, it does not.

It does actually ... though it may be indirect

It has no place dictating law. It does dictate law, but so does religion.

For religion to dictate law, I can understand it has no place too, as they are the visions of a % of a population
But culture, exisiting from the very fabric that makes up for the majority of the population, their voice counts, else they would live in tirany and their laws dictated by tyrants

edit: we still have a few of those countries btw

Majority imposed tyranny is still tyranny.

Laws should be based on what is fair and just, culture has no business deciding that.

Hahahahahahahaha... oh how naive...culture has every business deciding that. How do you define what is fair? By what you believe.. where does that come from? Experience, what shapes experience and social dictates? Could it be culture? Culture will be a massive deciding factor in what's fair. Do you consider killing people who take others lives fair? You're from texas so for the sake of the example I will. It's your culture's opinion, belief that a life is equal to a life in most respects and that is a fair trade. In the UK on the other hand.. it's not. There is no death sentence for murder.. it's our culture that life is more sacred than punishment or revenge, that life for life is not fair because it's not necessarily equal, it's not fair for us to play god in this case and take a life as that's as bad as the criminal.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:The bottom line is this, Queers (i prefer the term sickos or degenerates), can have the same equality (or whatever the hell they are asking for) in the eyes of the law, but as a "married" man i am OFFENDED they want to give their same sex union the same name as my union to a female partner. That OFFENDS ME GREATLY!

What also offends me greatly is that they want kids. if they want kids so badly they can find a partner and have one together...otherwise...tough **Filtered**!

Of all the thousands and thousands of words i cannot believe they cannot find...better yet, create their own word. why is it...oh NVM!


I'm no bigot, i just don't tolerate this kind of crap...and if i may be so bold, unless any of you are queer...neither should any of you!

I think you're entitled to your own beliefs but to spout them here you need to justify them Avenger and as the patriarch of this entire section I remind you that this is a very free thinking section but as I pointed out targeted hate is immensely frowned upon, especially without justification.

I would say to you sir if your reasons are private and not for public consumption then your derogatory tone should be kept out of sight with them.

Jedi~Tank wrote:

Psyko wrote:

Duck Dodgers wrote:

Dovahkiin wrote:But even if that was a commandment, I would still take the position I have. Religion has no place dictating law.

Indeed, but culture does.

Culture is the whole problem when it comes to same-sex marriage.

A child in our current culture and society, whether raised by a single parent, a mom and dad, or a same-sex couple, is raised with the ideals of our culture. Even if that child were to, at some point in time, discover they are attracted to members of the same sex, or both sexes, or no sexes, it is still a part of their culture to want to marry the person they love and eventually have a family unit (traditional or untraditional). Just because an individual is LGBTQ does not mean they have entirely different cultural values than the rest of society.

The biggest struggle LGBTQ people go through is surviving their culture. At some point in their life they learn they feel differently than the majority of our society. They get teased, bullied, threatened, beaten, disowned by their families, and lose friends because they have become cultural deviants. They aren't a different culture entirely, as they have many of the same cultural views as the rest of us with only a few small (in my opinion) differences.

Especially those who have been disowned by their family and/or friends for being who they are want to eventually have their own family where a child can be loved and supported no matter what their decisions in life. I disagree with the notion same-sex couples would be bad parents; yes, it would be different, but not bad for the child. Also, despite the number of heterosexual couples wanting to adopt, there are still more kids than there are families. If the child is old enough to make the decision on if they want to be raised by two moms/dads or grow up in an orphanage, let them make that choice.

Good points, but leaving those kind of decisions up to a child to make is kinda back asswords.

Making the decision to not allow a child to have any kind of parents/family/home at all isn't any better.

RepliMagni wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16935270

The Supreme Court will no doubt overrule that.


Interesting how it went to a 'ban' now, indicating that 'allowing' has become the 'natural state'. (Hope that makes some sense?)

Strange stuff

So, a ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional but the federal reserve act, the patriot act, the TSA, the NDAA, the John Warner Defence Authorisation Act etc etc...are not unconstitutional

Dovahkiin wrote:Without state recognition, marriage is nothing more than a symbolic gesture written out on a piece of paper.

Failure to recognize one marriage, while recognizing another is discrimination, and discrimination based on sexuality is flatout wrong.

Furthermore, state recognition of marriage is not a right. The state either needs to recognize all marriage, or no marriage.

I for one, demand no more state discrimination based on sexuality. Bigotry has no place in the government.

Marriage is not just a legally binding contract, it is a religious ceremony so who has the rights ??? The people wanting to marry or the religion determining who they will allow to marry under the rules of that religion ?

Personally I dont agree with organised religion of any kind, and think they should be rebranded as ideological clubs, 'we who join these clubs believe in and chose to live by this set of ideals & rules so long as they do no harm to others outside the club' etc.

And I think all marriage should be rebranded as 'Personal Contracts / partnerships' which they pretty much are given the laws in most countries, but clearly separating the religions from the legal and contractual rights & obligations of the nation they occur in ( or chose to live in afterwards ).

As for gay marriage ( Personal Contracts / partnerships ), I dont understand them or how they think/feel, dont suppose any 'straight' person can understand them, but fine IMO if people choose to live that way it's none of my business and dont bother me so long as same as religions they do no harm to others, and dont try to force their beliefs on others.

Is it natural ? Obviously not when it comes to procreation, you definitely need a contribution from each gender lol But looking at other animals very few are monotonous, very few have the male as a care giver, and a great many have heard mentality where the males & females only come together for procreation. So how much of the way human relationships work is down to nature, and how much is down to social structure and indoctrination based on historic needs outdated by women's rights & human conquest of the natural world. Is the only reason animals dont go gay because they dont have sex for pleasure or chose partners out of attraction/common interests, they chose purely on darwinism, the strongest, biggest, best chance of good genes for offspring.

Sexuality, Another funny one, most men are aroused by seeing two women together, yet I have never heard of a women aroused by two men together. Most men find the thought of two men together disgusting, yet most women ( according to research on web not my personal ex's lol ) apparently admit to have been bi-curious at some point. So lesbians are more acceptable than gay men, somehow seem less 'unnatural'. Is this per-programmed 'hardwired' into us as instinct, or is it social indoctrination at work again ? I'd guess it's instinctual since males naturally compete while females are naturally more social and interactive.

Children in raised by couples in gay Personal Contracts / partnerships, now thats where it gets really tricky. Obviously Lesbian couples had can still have kids ( sperm donors, one night stands etc ), but gay men cannot ( I suppose surrogates but that is far rarer and illegal if paid for ). So adoption ? Would any adoption agency really give a baby to gay male couple ? I doubt it. Are gay males lesser parents than lesbians ? Probably no better or worse, comes down to the individuals more than the gender same as in hetro couples. Should any gay people, male or female be allowed to raise children ? If you say it's OK for them to be gay, you cant really limit their rights, that would be hypocrisy, it's either right or wrong, cant be right with conditions, if they cant raise kids, then can they work in schools and teach kids ? Whole grey area is a mess.



Dont know if it was better or worse when being gay was illegal, but was certainly a hell of a lot simpler lol